Funny that you cite soccer's World Cup. England, commonly thought to have the strongest national team at the time, did not send its squad to the 1930, 34, or 38 editions because it deemed the tournament to be beneath its notice.

EDIT: Are you not reading these quotes from players btw? Do you honestly think they will give a shit about a World Cup that's put on by an organization they already detest?

FlyHigh wrote:Funny that you cite soccer's World Cup. England, commonly thought to have the strongest national team at the time, did not send its squad to the 1930, 34, or 38 editions because it deemed the tournament to be beneath its notice.

... you realize this buttresses my point, right? Create and commit to the tourney, and it will gain hold over time.

EDIT: Are you not reading these quotes from players btw? Do you honestly think they will give a shit about a World Cup that's put on by an organization they already detest?

This generation? Maybe not. 20 years from now? Of course, my theoretical tourney is an IIHF headed tourney, as opposed to NHL headed.

So, everybody is angry for 25 years and then once a generation or two passes through, maybe people will care about the World Cup of Hockey. I mean, yes, I agree on that point. Can't wait for World Cup 2040. So basically, eliminate a tournament that works and that everyone cares about. Instead, maybe, just maybe, in 25 years, we'll have a replacement tournament that people will care about. Oh, and by the way, we don't even know for sure that people will care about it, but they probably will. In 2040. Sounds like a great plan!

Also, it's naive/delusional to think that the NHL will punt on the Olympics and then give control of a marquee tournament to the IIHF, come on man.

jester wrote:Is there, though? For starters, I know you're a soccer fan ... and the "uniquely special" nature of the Olympics collapses there. The NBA started sending it's players out of pure spite at the joke that Olympic basketball was ... and do people really care that much about Olympic basketball a couple decades later? Baseball? Football? Tennis? Golf?

The Olympics are uniquely special for the many sports that get zero attention outside of the Olympics. Olympic wrestling is uniquely special ... Olympic hockey/basketball/soccer is a fun tournament on the side of a much bigger pie.

Couldn't you argue the same applies to the NHL with the pie being hockey, and the slice being the NHL? In 2010 while Team USA was competing for gold, bars in Brooklyn were packed and that was an area where I struggled even to find casual Rangers/Islanders/Devils fans. And the ones I did were transplant Devils' fans out of New Jersey.

A large portion of the population clearly cared about those games; I tend to think it's because it wasn't just the Lidstrom and Datsyuk suspension for skipping the ASG (DET), or the Mike Peluso cover-up (NJD), or the Thrashers' relocation (ATL), or the Dollar Bill Blackhawks Black-out (CHI). It was just hockey being played for the sake of hockey by talented players (NOT VANDEVELDE), and it was extremely enjoyable.

jester wrote:

FlyHigh wrote:Funny that you cite soccer's World Cup. England, commonly thought to have the strongest national team at the time, did not send its squad to the 1930, 34, or 38 editions because it deemed the tournament to be beneath its notice.

... you realize this buttresses my point, right? Create and commit to the tourney, and it will gain hold over time.

Yeah... as long as there's a North America U23.6125 team the World Cup will struggle to have even a fraction of the credibility as the Olympic games do. And for all the chatter concerning risk of injury (slightly OT), the World Cup does nothing to address any of that.

The World Cup of hockey should feature national teams. Full stop. Should occur every four years without question, and without haggling over player involvement. Full stop. It should rotate host nation(s) on a regular basis.

This is not hard to accomplish, it just requires committing to it.

And, yes, national teams draw interest ... that is not and never will be an important calculation for the NHL owners. You can complain about that, but you also aren't 100s of million deep on an investment. And, let's be real clear, a lot of this is players wanting the best of all world's. I wonder how many players would agree to the Olympics if it were contingent on voiding their contract guarantee.

Rogers Pancreas wrote:And for all the chatter concerning risk of injury (slightly OT), the World Cup does nothing to address any of that.

I guarantee you there are numerous owners that are privately opposed to any sort of international competition, or, at the very least, wish they could fully oppose it. Mark Cuban, for example, has publicly spoken about his reservation with regard to allowing NBA players to compete internationally.

The difference with the World Cup, in theory, is that it puts the games outside the NHL schedule; creates less scheduling pressure during the season (injury risk rises with tired players); and doesn't leave injured players facing the stretch run and playoffs. But, yeah, there is no perfect solution with the injury risk.

jester wrote:The World Cup of hockey should feature national teams. Full stop. Should occur every four years without question, and without haggling over player involvement. Full stop. It should rotate host nation(s) on a regular basis.

This is not hard to accomplish, it just requires committing to it.

And, yes, national teams draw interest ... that is not and never will be an important calculation for the NHL owners. You can complain about that, but you also aren't 100s of million deep on an investment. And, let's be real clear, a lot of this is players wanting the best of all world's. I wonder how many players would agree to the Olympics if it were contingent on voiding their contract guarantee.

The Olympics just aren't the sacred cow they're being made out to be.

Sorry to be a bother, Jester. This just happens to be the most interesting conversation that's been had in the better part of two years.

Your vision of what the World Cup should be is basically what the Olympics are, except without the pain in the dick owners carrying on about what the world owes them. And I'm sure there are other franchises (owners) out there that are concerned about losing their golden goose to injuries, or just plain losing them (for an extended period of time). But only the NHL's owners have bitched like this. I haven't heard much coming out of the KHL, or the SHL, or Liiga. And those league, not franchises, LEAGUES are in a far more precarious situation than the NHL.

And I agree, the NHL isn't this sacred cow... if the true fans, and players alike, succumb to apathy the same way we all gave in to the fucking shoot-out. The NHL has proven it doesn't give a fuck about you or I. But my hope is players like Jake, and Ovechkin just say "fuck it", and then players like Giroux say "fuck it" because they don't want to see Team Canada spanked by their NHL kin.

jester wrote:The World Cup of hockey should feature national teams. Full stop. Should occur every four years without question, and without haggling over player involvement. Full stop. It should rotate host nation(s) on a regular basis.

This is not hard to accomplish, it just requires committing to it.

And, yes, national teams draw interest ... that is not and never will be an important calculation for the NHL owners. You can complain about that, but you also aren't 100s of million deep on an investment. And, let's be real clear, a lot of this is players wanting the best of all world's. I wonder how many players would agree to the Olympics if it were contingent on voiding their contract guarantee.

jester wrote:The World Cup of hockey should feature national teams. Full stop. Should occur every four years without question, and without haggling over player involvement. Full stop. It should rotate host nation(s) on a regular basis.

This is not hard to accomplish, it just requires committing to it.

And, yes, national teams draw interest ... that is not and never will be an important calculation for the NHL owners. You can complain about that, but you also aren't 100s of million deep on an investment. And, let's be real clear, a lot of this is players wanting the best of all world's. I wonder how many players would agree to the Olympics if it were contingent on voiding their contract guarantee.

The Olympics just aren't the sacred cow they're being made out to be.

Congratulations, you just described the Olympics!

In any case, Hover just won the argument.

Or the FIFA World Cup. Or the IIHF World Championship reimagined. Or any tournament. Which gets to the heart of the matter ... there's nothing especially unique about the Olympics, other than it's consistent locale of an authoritarian regime under the operation of a deeply corrupt institution.

jester wrote:The World Cup of hockey should feature national teams. Full stop. Should occur every four years without question, and without haggling over player involvement. Full stop. It should rotate host nation(s) on a regular basis.

This is not hard to accomplish, it just requires committing to it.

And, yes, national teams draw interest ... that is not and never will be an important calculation for the NHL owners. You can complain about that, but you also aren't 100s of million deep on an investment. And, let's be real clear, a lot of this is players wanting the best of all world's. I wonder how many players would agree to the Olympics if it were contingent on voiding their contract guarantee.

The Olympics just aren't the sacred cow they're being made out to be.

Sorry to be a bother, Jester. This just happens to be the most interesting conversation that's been had in the better part of two years.

Your vision of what the World Cup should be is basically what the Olympics are, except without the pain in the dick owners carrying on about what the world owes them. And I'm sure there are other franchises (owners) out there that are concerned about losing their golden goose to injuries, or just plain losing them (for an extended period of time). But only the NHL's owners have bitched like this. I haven't heard much coming out of the KHL, or the SHL, or Liiga. And those league, not franchises, LEAGUES are in a far more precarious situation than the NHL.

And I agree, the NHL isn't this sacred cow... if the true fans, and players alike, succumb to apathy the same way we all gave in to the fucking shoot-out. The NHL has proven it doesn't give a fuck about you or I. But my hope is players like Jake, and Ovechkin just say "fuck it", and then players like Giroux say "fuck it" because they don't want to see Team Canada spanked by their NHL kin.

... I wouldn't complain about shootouts while extolling the virtues of the Olympics.

No one involved in these negotiations really cares about you or I, RP. The NHL is concerned about itself. The IOC is concerned about itself. The players are concerned about themselves. There is zero altruism in any of these people's posturing.

Sports culture is vastly different in Europe, RP, and the financials involved are much different. Additionally, the Olympics are significantly less impactful on most of those leagues. Sweden and Finland fill their rosters with NHL players for the most part, for example. Same goes for the Czechs, etc. Interesting enough, lack of NHL participation will impact those leagues a good bit.

FlyHigh wrote:Oh interesting I was thinking the opposite based on his tenure here. Guess the theory is that working for Sutter would make him a better coach?

Indeed. I firmly believe his primary flaw was lack of experience. He was very good at getting the team to play hard for him, but the team struggled with the details. As you might recall, he basically became a HC at both the AHL and NHL levels with no real apprenticeship. He assisted Barber briefly (a guy that was weak on the details himself), and then got promoted to assist Hitch the year he got fired.

So, presumably he got an opportunity to learn out there. He would not be the first (or last) coach to perform much better in his second job. Shit, we all watched one of the best current examples of it in baseball: Terry Francona.

Definitely makes sense, hope it works out for him, always seemed like a decent guy overall. Certainly has quite a challenge with that LAK roster if he does get the job, hopefully they would have some patience.